Income distribution?
-
Just another point.
Note that SIA does not treat Singaporeans well, there are numerous complaints to that.
On the contrast, BA treats their british citizens extra well, coz,well, they are british.
IF Singaporeans are favoured to some extent, and treated better than foreigners, I would say that the nation spirit would have been more existent now.
Again, I don't mean stupid biasness, but biasness that will help bring the entire country to be able to compete at a global level
Overall, we have noted time and again, that there is no advantage to being a Singaporean, coz its the way this country works, it doesn't value its citizens. -
Interesting how I keep going on and on
1) Interesting, so you MIGHT agree with my assumed limited knowledge? True, no one does things without any benefits. But common sense also should tell you that protectionism does not equal ZERO benefits to the other party. Its always a win-win thing. Protectionism laws ensure that to the country opening its doors, it gets its WIN as well.
The word MIGHT was purposely put there to give you the benefit of doubt that your arguement "could" make some sense. That is supposed to be a sarcastic remark if you havent realise it
In a open economy like Singapore that promote free trade, protectionism will not give us zero benefits, it will give us negative benefits.
2) But I suppose you forgot Genting has run a casino before? Think with this statement, its enough to refute you totally to what you are implying (again).
I suppose you have forgotten that an INTERGRATED RESORT (IR) is not just about casino and our government has hinted to the potential bidders that we want an IR that is similar to the business model of Venetian in LV, whereby 70% of the revenue will come from non-gaming businesses. Do you think think by having experience operating casino will means that you are capable of operating world class museum, keeping whale sharks and managing a theme park like Universal Studio?
3) With regards to me questioning you on your knowledge, kindly refer to (1). You MIGHT agree with my assumed limited knowledge. So your knowledge is also limited?
And I think there is nothing wrong with govt being slightly favorable to local companies, if btw local and foreign companies, they are more or less equal?
That's how you bring in competition, and reward Singapore firms for rising up to the challenge. That's how Korea and Japan build up their brands, coz they support their local companies
Stupid favourtism is, well, stupid. Favoring your local companies when they cannot perform is stupid. But, if your local companies rise up to the challenge, then I don't see why we can't favour them to reward them for their tenacity.
If you bring in competition, and result in the demise of even capable Singaporeans, then what's the point of competition? Isn't competition meant to help raise the standards of Singaporeans?
Or Are you telling me that you should open your doors so wide that you are stripped naked and robbed of your valuables, and you should thank the robber for robbing you, because you have a fetish for being naked and robbed?
If you want to use sex and violence to discribe an open economy like Singapore, that is fine with me. And yes, Singapore is one of the most open economy in the world. -
Originally posted by Gazelle:
1) What's new about you? You have always been rude
Interesting how I keep going on and on
1) Interesting, so you MIGHT agree with my assumed limited knowledge? True, no one does things without any benefits. But common sense also should tell you that protectionism does not equal ZERO benefits to the other party. Its always a win-win thing. Protectionism laws ensure that to the country opening its doors, it gets its WIN as well.
[b]The word MIGHT was purposely put there to give you the benefit of doubt that your arguement "could" make some sense. That is supposed to be a sarcastic remark if you havent realise it
In a open economy like Singapore that promote free trade, protectionism will not give us zero benefits, it will give us negative benefits.
2) But I suppose you forgot Genting has run a casino before? Think with this statement, its enough to refute you totally to what you are implying (again).
I suppose you have forgotten that an INTERGRATED RESORT (IR) is not just about casino and our government has hinted to the potential bidders that we want an IR that is similar to the business model of Venetian in LV, whereby 70% of the revenue will come from non-gaming businesses. Do you think think by having experience operating casino will means that you are capable of operating world class museum, keeping whale sharks and managing a theme park like Universal Studio?
3) With regards to me questioning you on your knowledge, kindly refer to (1). You MIGHT agree with my assumed limited knowledge. So your knowledge is also limited?
And I think there is nothing wrong with govt being slightly favorable to local companies, if btw local and foreign companies, they are more or less equal?
That's how you bring in competition, and reward Singapore firms for rising up to the challenge. That's how Korea and Japan build up their brands, coz they support their local companies
Stupid favourtism is, well, stupid. Favoring your local companies when they cannot perform is stupid. But, if your local companies rise up to the challenge, then I don't see why we can't favour them to reward them for their tenacity.
If you bring in competition, and result in the demise of even capable Singaporeans, then what's the point of competition? Isn't competition meant to help raise the standards of Singaporeans?
Or Are you telling me that you should open your doors so wide that you are stripped naked and robbed of your valuables, and you should thank the robber for robbing you, because you have a fetish for being naked and robbed?
If you want to use sex and violence to discribe an open economy like Singapore, that is fine with me. And yes, Singapore is one of the most open economy in the world. [/b]
And haven't you noticed you din have the common sense at the initial argument, that a protectionism policy is a win-win policy? Its only now that I have reminded you how extreme your thoughts are, that you are quick to cover your tracks.
So how negative is negative? Aren't you practising the same thing that you accuse others of. Making assumptions without any support to your comments?
2) Sigh... whatever it is, the entire concept of IR WAS from the idea of a casino, isn't it? The idea of an IR was to ensure the casino will not run into social protests here. The main thing IS the casino, otherwise the entire IR concept WILL fall flat
But that's outside of this argument.
I just merely am refutting your comparisons of Genting and the Singapore companies, and you cannot deny that point, that you aren't making a fair comparison.
3) Its up to you what you want to think. If an open economy results in pain to the majority of Singaporeans, then what's the point? If it only serves to bring wealth to only a selected group of 'talented' people, then is this a country/nation/whatever?
And also, you never argue against my point on the purpose of bringing in competition, so I assume you have quietly agreed to that point.
And I just enjoy this. Let me explain to you about the concept of robbery. If a foreign firm comes in here and performs the following:
- Take a project
- Bring in foreigners, thus depriving abled Singaporeans from a job
- Move all money back to India
- Lousy project deliverables
Where is the Win for us?
The truth is, having the most open economy in the world does us no good, if our people suffer from it, and all we have, is a name in the world as the most open economy.
And I wish to add, that what the govt did in IR, IS A protectionism tactic, ensuring the consortium that takes the project, promises certain criteria to benefit Singapore. I don't see where is the NEGATIVE benefit in that? -
I have already clocked close to a million air miles with SIA and surprising, I dont not feel that SIA stewardess are anti Singaporeans? I would like to know if those numerous complaints are isolated cases or are they happening everyday and on every flights?Originally posted by soul_rage:Just another point.
Note that SIA does not treat Singaporeans well, there are numerous complaints to that.
On the contrast, BA treats their british citizens extra well, coz,well, they are british.
IF Singaporeans are favoured to some extent, and treated better than foreigners, I would say that the nation spirit would have been more existent now.
Again, I don't mean stupid biasness, but biasness that will help bring the entire country to be able to compete at a global level
Overall, we have noted time and again, that there is no advantage to being a Singaporean, coz its the way this country works, it doesn't value its citizens.
And would you be kind enough to explain the relationship between flying Singapore airline to being a citizen in Singapore? -
gosh.. I thought you said you were very knowledgeable? Wasn't this in the news? And I even attended a course where the course conductor was an ex-SIA girl, and she also mentioned this issue. It was a KNOWN complaintOriginally posted by Gazelle:I have already clocked close to a million air miles with SIA and surprising, I dont not feel that SIA stewardess are anti Singaporeans? I would like to know if those numerous complaints are isolated cases or are they happening everyday and on every flights?
And would you be kind enough to explain the relationship between flying Singapore airline to being a citizen in Singapore?
No relationship, just an example on how there are no benefits of being a Singaporean, and this translates to many things even in Singapore. -
[quote]Originally posted by soul_rage:
1) What's new about you? You have always been rude
And haven't you noticed you din have the common sense at the initial argument, that a protectionism policy is a win-win policy? Its only now that I have reminded you how extreme your thoughts are, that you are quick to cover your tracks.
So how negative is negative? Aren't you practising the same thing that you accuse others of. Making assumptions without any support to your comments?
You might want to do some studies on macroeconomics before you talk about protectionism. Thats my advice to you.
2) Sigh... whatever it is, the entire concept of IR WAS from the idea of a casino, isn't it? The idea of an IR was to ensure the casino will not run into social protests here. The main thing IS the casino, otherwise the entire IR concept WILL fall flat
But that's outside of this argument.
I just merely am refutting your comparisons of Genting and the Singapore companies, and you cannot deny that point, that you aren't making a fair comparison.
You are wrong again, the whole idea of having IR is to promote tourism and to boost tourism you dont just build a casino, you focus on MICE and having world class theme park.
Casino is just a source of fund for the bidders to make such huge investment and ofcourse a source of tax revenue for the government. Contrary to what you are saying, the non-gaming component of both LV Sands and RWS are profit centre by itself, not money losing operaton supported by the casino
3) Its up to you what you want to think. If an open economy results in pain to the majority of Singaporeans, then what's the point? If it only serves to bring wealth to only a selected group of 'talented' people, then is this a country/nation/whatever?
And also, you never argue against my point on the purpose of bringing in competition, so I assume you have quietly agreed to that point.
And I just enjoy this. Let me explain to you about the concept of robbery. If a foreign firm comes in here and performs the following:
- Take a project
- Bring in foreigners, thus depriving abled Singaporeans from a job
- Move all money back to India
- Lousy project deliverables
Where is the Win for us?
The truth is, having the most open economy in the world does us no good, if our people suffer from it, and all we have, is a name in the world as the most open economy.
The success of Singapore is build around the concept of an open economy so that we can be an air hub, sea hub, financial hub in SE Asia. If we dont have all these pillars, Singapore is FINISHED.
Can I know if you have finish your macroeconomics 101?
And I wish to add, that what the govt did in IR, IS A protectionism tactic, ensuring the consortium that takes the project, promises certain criteria to benefit Singapore. I don't see where is the NEGATIVE benefit in that?
That is not protectionism, that is simply a FDI. If STB intentionally award both IR projects to Keppeland and Capitaland, that would be protestionism.
The benefits you talking about is not from protectionism, its from being being an open economy that has no protestionism for Singapore companies.
PS. Are you sure you are in the top10% income group in Singapore? -
I thought I ask you if those complaints are isolated cases or are they happening everyday and on every flight?Originally posted by soul_rage:gosh.. I thought you said you were very knowledgeable? Wasn't this in the news? And I even attended a course where the course conductor was an ex-SIA girl, and she also mentioned this issue. It was a KNOWN complaint
No relationship, just an example on how there are no benefits of being a Singaporean, and this translates to many things even in Singapore.
So as an Singaporeans, I presume you expects other singaporeans to treat you like a KING, or is it because you pride yourself as a top10% income earner in Singapore so you deserve the one?
If you are a sucker for good services, try the raffles and first class. -
Originally posted by Gazelle:
well here we go again, hurling abuses at people when you can't answer, and changing topics whenever you can't answer.
[quote]Originally posted by soul_rage:
1) What's new about you? You have always been rude
And haven't you noticed you din have the common sense at the initial argument, that a protectionism policy is a win-win policy? Its only now that I have reminded you how extreme your thoughts are, that you are quick to cover your tracks.
So how negative is negative? Aren't you practising the same thing that you accuse others of. Making assumptions without any support to your comments?
[b]You might want to do some studies on macroeconomics before you talk about protectionism. Thats my advice to you.
2) Sigh... whatever it is, the entire concept of IR WAS from the idea of a casino, isn't it? The idea of an IR was to ensure the casino will not run into social protests here. The main thing IS the casino, otherwise the entire IR concept WILL fall flat
But that's outside of this argument.
I just merely am refutting your comparisons of Genting and the Singapore companies, and you cannot deny that point, that you aren't making a fair comparison.
You are wrong again, the whole idea of having IR is to promote tourism and to boost tourism you dont just build a casino, you focus on MICE and having world class theme park.
Casino is just a source of fund for the bidders to make such huge investment and ofcourse a source of tax revenue for the government. Contrary to what you are saying, the non-gaming component of both LV Sands and RWS are profit centre by itself, not money losing operaton supported by the casino
3) Its up to you what you want to think. If an open economy results in pain to the majority of Singaporeans, then what's the point? If it only serves to bring wealth to only a selected group of 'talented' people, then is this a country/nation/whatever?
And also, you never argue against my point on the purpose of bringing in competition, so I assume you have quietly agreed to that point.
And I just enjoy this. Let me explain to you about the concept of robbery. If a foreign firm comes in here and performs the following:
- Take a project
- Bring in foreigners, thus depriving abled Singaporeans from a job
- Move all money back to India
- Lousy project deliverables
Where is the Win for us?
The truth is, having the most open economy in the world does us no good, if our people suffer from it, and all we have, is a name in the world as the most open economy.
The success of Singapore is build around the concept of an open economy so that we can be an air hub, sea hub, financial hub in SE Asia. If we dont have all these pillars, Singapore is FINISHED.
Can I know if you have finish your macroeconomics 101?
And I wish to add, that what the govt did in IR, IS A protectionism tactic, ensuring the consortium that takes the project, promises certain criteria to benefit Singapore. I don't see where is the NEGATIVE benefit in that?
That is not protectionism, that is simply a FDI. If STB intentionally award both IR projects to Keppeland and Capitaland, that would be protestionism.
The benefits you talking about is not from protectionism, its from being being an open economy that has no protestionism for Singapore companies.
PS. Are you sure you are in the top10% income group in Singapore?
[/b]
I think this conversation stops here, not becoz I can't answer you, but coz I told the rest I don't want to waste time arguing with you who argues for the sake of arguing. Like I said, self-reflect on yourself before you start screaming and hurling abusive language at others.
I also wanted to express my opinion on how we have become a confused hub (medical, gaming, bio, ..., the list goes on), that we do not have any actual pillars (unlike Korea or Japan whom are well-known for specific pillars in the world). But I think I am too lazy to further argue with you, coz its useless to talk to you
And believe what you want The fact is, I know who you are, and I know I am younger than you, and I am catching up with you -
"So as A Singaporean... " sigh... where do I bother correcting someone who thinks he knows best?Originally posted by Gazelle:I thought I ask you if those complaints are isolated cases or are they happening everyday and on every flight?
So as an Singaporeans, I presume you expects other singaporeans to treat you like a KING, or is it because you pride yourself as a top10% income earner in Singapore so you deserve the one?
If you are a sucker for good services, try the raffles and first class.
I thought I told you its a known issue, so its a common complaint, and so its happening regularly since it keeps coming up?
No, I din say treat me like a KING, kindly stop putting words in my mouth. Did BA treat its citizens like KING? No, they treated them as fellow countrymen, and are proud to see their own countrymen. Again, extremism demonstrated here from Gazelle.
If you are a sucker for insults, try attending a courtesy class. No wonder govt needs to have courtesy campaigns, coz we need to cultivate people like you. -
Woohoo, let's see who has the last post on this topic.
-
Just to summarize, what I have learn from soul_rage today.
a) Protectionism is good for Singapore and it promotes investment like IRs
b) Open economy is bad for Singapore and its people
c) 80/20 rule in income distribution theory
d) If your national carrier doest threat you well, you should consider leaving the country.
f) Singapore IRs is an example of protectionism
g) Local and foreign companies offer the same benefits to Singapore economy
h) All casino operators can operate world class IR by themselves
i) Singapore employer prefers more expensive Indian FT to cheaper average local graduate.
j) it is wrong for government to outsource project to overseas companies even if it is better value for money.
k) S-league foreign footballers are all highly educated individual from overseas
l) You need paper qualification to be a talent.
m) Income gap = living standard
n) Singapore government is pro rich people, not pro business. -
without deliberation, Gazelle.Originally posted by charlize:Woohoo, let's see who has the last post on this topic.
I am resting my case, coz its useless arguing any further with him. Will only cause his blood pressure to rise further, and causing him anger. Bad karma for me actually.
Am going back to the topic.
Attached is this info from wikipedia on Singapore
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Singapore
Growth in household income by decile -
Even your summaries are so extreme. I can't be bothered to argue with you any further, lest to summarize Gazelle as follows:Originally posted by Gazelle:Just to summarize, what I have learn from soul_rage today.
a) Protectionism is good for Singapore and it promotes investment like IRs
b) Open economy is bad for Singapore and its people
c) 80/20 rule in income distribution theory
d) If your national carrier doest threat you well, you should consider leaving the country.
f) Singapore IRs is an example of protectionism
g) Local and foreign companies offer the same benefits to Singapore economy
h) All casino operators can operate world class IR by themselves
i) Singapore employer prefers more expensive Indian FT to cheaper average local graduate.
j) it is wrong for government to outsource project to overseas companies even if it is better value for money.
k) S-league foreign footballers are all highly educated individual from overseas
l) You need paper qualification to be a talent.
m) Income gap = living standard
n) Singapore government is pro rich people, not pro business.
1) Rude
2) Myopic
3) Extreme (Puts words into people's mouth) -
-
The 'negative' statistics are hard to come by afa Governmental depts concerned. They only boasts 'positive' news. Typical.
Looking at long hours many Singaporeans are putting in their workplace, clearly show that working people are under a heavy financial duress.
In other words, most of us are clearly underpaid (and overworked), especially if you compare with other 1st world cities.
Its not that our government dont have it, its just that they dont want Singaporeans to be well-paid and becoming complacent. A typical socialistic mentality.
Have you wondered why Singaporeans were recently surveyed to be the fastest mover in the world?
We are walking faster than anyone else in the world!
So much stress, so little time to enjoy our short lives! -
Over work, over spend and over stress.
Under paid is many average workers in Singapore face. -
Learn from the Chinese worker who came to work as a pipe fitter for $600 a month, worked hard over weekends and took all overtime assignments so he was not retrenched even during the 1997 economic crisis, and now able to buy his own 4-room flat as a supervisor in a local shipyard.Originally posted by T.Ryousuke:Over work, over spend and over stress.
Under paid is many average workers in Singapore face.
Chi de ku zhong ku, fang wei ren shang ren -
I think many are already chi hen duo ku, what with the rising GST, high prices of PUBLIC housing, increasing transport costs etc.Originally posted by oxford mushroom:Learn from the Chinese worker who came to work as a pipe fitter for $600 a month, worked hard over weekends and took all overtime assignments so he was not retrenched even during the 1997 economic crisis, and now able to buy his own 4-room flat as a supervisor in a local shipyard.
Chi de ku zhong ku, fang wei ren shang ren